MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2466430666 · doi:10.1118/1.4955900

SU‐F‐I‐72: Evaluation of the Ancillary Lead Shielding for Optimizing Radiation Protection in the Interventional Radiology Department

2016· article· en· W2466430666 on OpenAlexaff
Elena Tonkopi, Christopher B. Lightfoot, Éric Leblanc

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiation Dose and Imaging
Canadian institutionsQueen Elizabeth II Health Sciences CentreDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadiation protectionMedical physicsElectromagnetic shieldingInterventional radiologyMedicineDosimetryLead (geology)Nuclear medicineRadiation shieldingRadiation doseRadiologyEngineeringElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: The rising complexity of interventional fluoroscopic procedures has resulted in an increase of occupational radiation exposures in the interventional radiology (IR) department. This study assessed the impact of ancillary shielding on optimizing radiation protection for the IR staff. Methods: Scattered radiation measurements were performed in two IR suites equipped with Axiom Artis systems (Siemens Healthcare, Erlangen, Germany) installed in 2006 and 2010. Both rooms had suspended ceiling‐mounted lead‐acrylic shields of 75×60 cm (Mavig, Munich, Germany) with lead equivalency of 0.5 mm, and under‐table drapes of 70×116 cm and 65×70 cm in the newer and the older room respectively. The larger skirt can be wrapped around the table's corner and in addition the newer suite had two upper shields of 25×55 cm and 25×35 cm. The patient was simulated by 30 cm of acrylic, air kerma rate (AKR) was measured with the 180cc ionization chamber (AccuPro Radcal Corporation, Monrovia, CA, USA) at different positions. The ancillary shields, x‐ray tube, image detector, and table height were adjusted by the IR radiologist to simulate various clinical setups. The same exposure parameters were used for all acquisitions. AKR measurements were made at different positions relative to the operator. Results: The AKR measurements demonstrated 91–99% x‐ray attenuation by the drapes in both suites. The smaller size of the under‐table skirt and absence of the side‐drapes in the older room resulted in a 20–50 fold increase of scattered radiation to the operator. The mobile suspended lead‐acrylic shield reduced AKR by 90–94% measured at 150–170 cm height. The recommendations were made to replace the smaller under‐table skirt and to use the ceiling‐mounted shields for all IR procedures. Conclusion: The ancillary shielding may significantly affect radiation exposure to the IR staff. The use of suspended ceiling‐mounted shields is especially important for reduction of interventional radiologists’ cranial radiation.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.979
Threshold uncertainty score0.138

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.063
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.280 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicRadiation Dose and ImagingFrench-language works237,207